Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The role of correspondence sections in post-publication peer review: A bibliometric study of general and internal medicine journals

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Scientific journals claim that correspondence sections are for post-publication peer review. We compared the conditions for submission and the bibliometrics of letters-to-editors published in leading medical journals in 2002 and 2007 using journal-derived information and data from PubMed and Journal Citation Reports. The median time limit for letter submissions decreased from 6 to 3.5 weeks, the median word limit from 400 to 350. The median number of letters per published article was near one in both years. Only about half of the letters were followed by an author reply in either year. Electronic response systems were available for four journals in 2007.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Peers reviewed. Lancet, 1 (1989): 1115–1116.

  2. Altman D. G., Poor-quality medical research: what can journals do? JAMA, 287 (2002) 2765–2767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Altman D. G., Unjustified restrictions on letters to the editor. PLoS Med., 2 (2005) e126; discussion e152.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Bhopal R. S, Tonks A., The role of letters in reviewing research. BMJ, 308 (1994) 1582–1583.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Boyton R. J, Arnold P.C., An audit of the BMJ’s correspondence columns. BMJ, 301 (1990) 1419–1420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Butler C., Old letters, new rules. Lancet, 361 (2003) 706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Caswell A., Letters to the editor 1991. An audit of the MJA’s correspondence columns. Med. J. Aust., 157 (1992) 63–64.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chew M., Villanueva E. V., van Der Weyden M. B., Life and times of the impact factor: retrospective analysis of trends for seven medical journals (1994–2005) and their Editors’ views. J. R. Soc. Med., 100 (2007) 142–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Code of conduct for editors of biomedical journals. Available at: http://publicationethics.org./code-conduct (2007).

  10. Crossan L., Delamothe T., Letters to the editor: the new order. Please respond to articles using website, email, or disk-but not paper. BMJ, 316 (1998) 1406–1410.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Davies S., New edicts for letters to the editor — Be electronic, bold, and concise — no more than 300 words. BMJ, 326 (2003) 63–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Golubic R., Rudes M., Kovacic N., Marusic M., Marusic A., Calculating impact factor: how bibliographical classification of journal items affects the impact factor of large and small journals. Sci. Eng. Ethics., 14 (2008) 41–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Horton R., Postpublication criticism and the shaping of clinical knowledge. JAMA, 287 (2002) 2843–2847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Mahesh S., Kabos M., Walvoort H. C., Overbeke A. J., Significance of letters published in the Dutch Journal of Medicine, 1997/98. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd, 145 (2001) 531–535.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Maric C., Harris P. J., Alcorn D., Notice of retraction of article. Clin. Exp. Pharmacol. Physiol., 31 (2004) 657–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Maron N. L., Smith K. K., Current Models of Digital Scholarly Communication. Results of an Investigation Conducted by Ithaka for the Association of Research Libraries. Association of Research Libraries. Washington, DC, 2008. Available at: www.arl.org

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mullan Z., Lancet correspondence: old letters, new rules. Lancet, 361 (2003) 12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Mullan Z., Letters or lectures? Lancet, 367 (2006) 1042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. O’connor P., Changes in renal medullary volume account for the relationship between arterial pressure and renal medullary interstitial cell lipid granule content. Clin. Exp. Pharmacol. Physiol., 31 (2004) 658; author reply 657.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Rennie D., Freedom and responsibility in medical publication: setting the balance right. JAMA, 280 (1998) 300–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Seglen P. O., Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ, 314 (1997) 498–502.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Stang A., Poole C., Schmidt-Pokrzywniak A., Pre-peer review, peer review, and post-peer review: Three areas with potential for improvement. J Clin Epidemiol, 61 (2008) 309–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). Policies on Letters to the Editor. March 2, 2007 to March 7, 2007. Available at: http://www.wame.org/wame-listserve-discussions/policies-on-letters-to-the-editor

  24. World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). Case Consultation: Authors Do Not Respond to Critical Letters to the Editor. May 2003. Available at: http://www.wame.org/ethics-resources/. (2003).

Journal information

  1. Annals of Internal Medicine. Philadelphia. American College of Physicians. ISSN: 0003-4819. Authors instructions available at: http://www.annals.org/shared/author_info.shtml#manuscriptpreparation

  2. Annual Review of Medicine. Palo Alto. Annual Reviews. ISSN: 0066-4219. Authors instructions available at: http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/help?context=additionalInformation#Authors.

  3. Archives of Internal Medicine. Chicago. American Medical Association. ISSN: 0003-9926. Author instructions available at: http://archinte.ama-assn.org/misc/authors.dtl.

  4. BMJ: British Medical Journal. London. British Medical Association. ISSN: 0959-8146. Authors instructions available at: http://resources.bmj.com/bmj/authors.

  5. CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal. Ottawa. Canadian Medical Association. ISSN: 0820-3946. Authors instructions available at: http://www.cmaj.ca/authors/index.shtml.

  6. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association. Chicago. American Medical Association. ISSN: 0002-9955. Authors instructions available at: http://jama.ama-assn.org/misc/authors.dtl.

  7. Lancet. London. Lancet Publishing Group. ISSN: 0140-6736. Authors instructions available at: http://www.thelancet.com/authors/lancet/authorinfo

  8. Medicine. Baltimore. Lippincott Williams Wilkins. ISSN: 0025-7974. Authors instructions available at: http://www.editorialmanager.com/md/.

  9. New England Journal of Medicine. Boston, Massachusetts Medical Society. ISSN: 0028-4793. Author instructions available at: http://authors.nejm.org/Misc/LetterInstrx.asp.

  10. Pediatrics. Elk Grove Village, IL. American Academy of Pediatrics. ISSN: 0031-4005. Author instructions available at: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/.

  11. PLoS Medicine. San Francisco. Public Library of Science. ISSN: 1549-1277. Authors instructions available at: http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/guidelines.php.

  12. PLoS ONE. San Francisco. Public Library of Science. ISSN: 1932-6203 Author instructions available at: http://www.plosone.org/static/commentGuidelines.action.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM), University of Bern, Finkenhubelweg 11, CH-3012, Bern, Switzerland

    Erik Von Elm, Simon Wandel & Peter Jüni

  2. German Cochrane Centre, Department of Medical Biometry and Statistics, University Medical Centre, Freiburg, Germany

    Erik Von Elm

  3. Clinical Trials Unit (CTU), Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland

    Simon Wandel & Peter Jüni

Authors
  1. Erik Von Elm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Simon Wandel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter Jüni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erik Von Elm.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Von Elm, E., Wandel, S. & Jüni, P. The role of correspondence sections in post-publication peer review: A bibliometric study of general and internal medicine journals. Scientometrics 81, 747–755 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-2236-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-2236-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation